Friday, October 4, 2013

Feel free to download and print the Parsha sheet and share it with your friends and family: Click here:Parshat Noach

"And
from there the Lord scattered them over the face of the entire Earth."
(Gen. 11:8). What was the sin of the Tower of Babel, and why was it
necessary to scatter them and create many languages? Are not
geographical distance and the differences of language and culture the
primary bases of misunderstanding and fear of the other? What did this
people do to deserve that their unity be shattered and that this
terrible curse be brought to the world?

While
many explanations have been offered to explain this sin, the simple
sense of the verse indicates that their very sin was that of unity, of
being one. Immediately upon Noah's exiting the ark, God had declared:
"Be fruitful and multiply and fill the Earth." (Gen 9:1), while those
who built the Tower said: "Come...and let us make us a name, lest we be
scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth." (Gen. 11:4, and see
Rashbam there). When God looked at what they had done, God saw not only
one language but also that "behold, the people are one." It was this
unity, the fact of having one language, being one people, and wanting to
stay that way, which was their sin. After their punishment, the
fulfillment of God's blessing to "fill the Earth," was realized, and the
peoples were "divided in their lands; every one after his tongue, after
their families, in their nations." (Gen 10:5; and see verses 21,
31-32).

We
can understand why God wanted the Earth to be populated, but what is
wrong with being unified, with sharing one language and one culture?
But perhaps there is something wrong with this. It is true that we
often speak of achdus,
of unity, and assume that it is an unqualified good, but is this
actually the case? Are there no dangers in unity? Certainly there is a
danger when unity becomes uniformity, when dissenting voices are
silenced, and when everyone's thoughts, words and actions are molded by a
groupthink mentality. Those who built the Tower were not only of one
tongue, but were also of devarim achadim,
which may be best translated as "of one discourse," or, as Radak
translates it "of one consensus." To only have one discourse, to
blindly commit to one ideology, may create a strong, single-minded
following, but it does so at the expense of crushing the individual, of
silencing dissent, and of perverting the pursuit of truth.

Unity
which is uniformity is not a good, but an evil. Debate, dissension and
disagreement, when pursued not for selfish or self-serving goals, but
to serve a higher purpose, is not an evil, but a good. It is a machloket liShem Shamayim,
a debate for the sake of Heaven. It is, in fact, the very essence of
Rabbinic Judaism, where minority opinions are preserved, differences are
respected, and debate is valued for its own sake. And in the end, the
greater truth emerges: "Through such repeated asking [of the same
halakhic question to multiple authorities] the two sides pay scrupulous
attention to the matter and when there are times where the first one has
made an error, and through this the truth of the matter will come to
light." (Tosafot Niddah20b, s.v. Agmirei).
The greatness of Torah she'b'al Peh is its decentralized nature and the
multiplicity of voices which have flourished and continue to flourish
as a result.

With
the punishment of the generation of the Dispersion, with the
introduction of a multiplicity of languages and of cultures, the concept
of difference was introduced, and thus new perspectives were able to
germinate and to grow, and new ideas could enter the world. Small
voices were able to be heard, and one such voice was that of Avraham.

Avraham
was a lone voice, introducing the idea of monotheism into a pagan
world. When he stayed in his homeland, Nimrod - the leader of the Tower
project according to the Rabbis - could not tolerate his heresy and
tried to have him killed, according to the famous midrash. The small
voice of monotheism was almost silenced before it could be heard. But
he then travelled to a different land, one which was welcoming of him as
a foreigner and prepared to hear his unconventional views. He was free
to "call out in the name of the Lord," his voice could be heard and the
Abrahamic faith began to take root and to flourish.

We
as a nation have been profoundly enriched because of the many cultures
are perspectives that are part of who we are as a people. "The Jewish
People were only scattered throughout the world so that converts could
be brought into them" (Pesachim 87b). The Jewish People have lived in
the U.S., in Canada, and in Israel. They have lived in Iran, Iraq, and
Yemen. They have lived in England, in France, in Germany, in Holland,
in Austria and in Italy. They have lived in Morocco, in North Africa,
in Argentina and in Venezuela. We - like the generation of the
Dispersion - have been scattered throughout the Earth. We have welcomed
in converts from all these lands. We have remained true to the Torah
and our commitments, and at the same time have opened ourselves to the
cultures, the perspectives, and the intellectual pursuits of the people
of these lands. Our different cultures, our different practices and our
different ideas have enriched us and have deepened us. Nahar nahar u'pashtei,
"Each river goes according to its flow," (Hullin 18b) and different
customs and halakhic differences are part of the beauty of our
tradition.

Sadly,
there are many today who reject this approach, and who would like to
believe that all Jews do or should look alike - white and Ashkenazi -
and that all Jews should think and act in exactly the same way.
Sometimes this desire expresses itself in a demand for a centralized
rabbinic authority, one that would define one standard for all Jews, and
reject any differences of practice or opinion. This is happening more
and more in recent years with the Israeli Rabbinate, and has had a
tragic impact on so many Jews, and also on so many prospective Jews -
prospective converts whose very difference could so benefit the Jewish
people.

This desire has also expressed itself in an importing of the attitude of "da'as Torah"
into the Modern Orthodox community, and in the claim that in communal
matters only one standard can be practiced, even if other practices are
acceptable halakhically. The argument goes something like this - "In
matters of communal policy, which are so important, should we not defer
to the opinion of da'as Torah?".
Of course, following one standard is fine, if it happens to be the
right one. But if it is the wrong one, we will all fail. Would it not
be better if we encouraged multiple practices, and let them play out in
the free marketplace of ideas? Perhaps the best thing for the community
is a different practice than the conventional one, or perhaps the best
thing is having a multiplicity of practices, so that the differences in
our community are respected, and all our different needs are addressed.

A
story is told of Rav Chaim Soloveitchik of Brisk. When the Moetzes
Gedolei HaTorah, a central rabbinic policy making council, was being
formed, he chose not to join. He was asked why he had made this
decision, and he replied, "Let me tell you why. When they introduced
electricity into Brisk, it was amazing. We could do away with the
lamps, which were messy and costly, and our entire town is now lit by
cheap, clean electricity. There is only one problem. In the past, when
one person's lamp went out, the others remained lit, and there was
light throughout Brisk. Now, however, when the generator goes out, the
entire town is cast into darkness."

Let
us all unite and work together to promote a committed Jewish society in
which difference is valued and treasured. It is through this that we
will escape darkness and that the truth will emerge to light.

The
first week of Fall zman got off to a great start with years 1-2
devoting their morning seder to Gemara and years 3-4 dividing into two
groups, one group learning Niddah with Rabbi Love and one learning
Gemara and pedagogy with Rabbi Dov Lerea.

Professional
classes started this week as well, with classes in Modern Orthodoxy,
Pastoral Counseling, Art of Education Thinking, and Lifecycles:
Halakha, Officiating and Pastoral. Second-year students also began
their 60 hours of chaplaincy field work at Columbia Presbyterian, with
parallel classes in Schar v'Onesh and Theodicy and in hilkhot bikkur cholim.

The
highlight of the week was a special visit this Thursday by M. K. Ruth
Calderon from the Yesh Atid party. Dr. Calderon's inaugural speech at
the Knesset a number of months ago, where she taught a passage in the
Talmud, was a profound moment for myself and many here at the yeshiva,
giving a sense of hope and optimism towards a time when all Jews can
learn from one another with open hearts and open minds and when we can
all connect to the Torah as our shared heritage. In her talk at YCT,
Dr. Calderon taught the passage in Baba Kama 117, about Rav Kahana and
Rabbi Yochanan and discussed the way in which in rabbinic culture - and
in any intensive learning culture - there can be a hyper-focus on
hierarchy and how that can and should play out in our own lives. A
discussion followed on the phenomenon of secular batei midrash in
Israel, appreciating the phenomenon of an authentic Jewish secular life,
and the political and national vision of the Yesh Atid party. What an
exciting way to start the zman!

Our
sincere wishes for a nechama for Tova Bulow and her family on the
passing of our beloved friend and board member, Norm Bulow, on erev
Sukkot. HaMakom yi'nachem etchem bi'toch she'ar avalei Tzion vi'Yerushalayim.

Mazal
Tov to Rabbi Steven Exler (YCT 2009) and Shira Billet on the birth of a
baby boy on motzei Yom Kippur, and on the bris on Chol HaMoed Sukkot,
when he was given the name Ilan Shmuel. Shetizku li'gadlo li'Torah li'chuppah u'li'ma'asim tovim!

Mazal
tov to Josh (YCT 2012) and Andrea Strosberg on the birth of a baby girl
this Simchat Torah. The girl was given the name Maayan Elyana. What a
wonderful double simcha! Shetizku li'gadlah li'Torah li'chuppah u'li'ma'asim tovim!